How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 What the heck   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

What the heck

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


25 posted 02-08-2006 07:51 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Sometimes I wonder if you don't read everything I say and reply off of "slice-and-dice" segments of choice.

I agree with you that it was wrong for Clinton to lie as he did. But you and I also both recognize that the scandal didn't start there. Many in the GOP really wanted to defame and embarrass Clinton long before Clinton shot himself in the foot for nothing more than political gain. The Democrats were mired in tremendous corruption during the Clinton era like the GOP is now with the Abramoff scandal, DeLay and the Wilson leak, and Gingrich and others desperately wanted to take advantage of their own catastrophes and bring Clinton down, and when a peek of his seedy personal life was revealed, they and the media just jumped all over it, seizing that as the fuel in embarrassing him and seizing greater control. (In the eyes of the general public, despite believing that personal folly to be of bad taste, it didn't affect the nation's generally approving views of Clinton as a president.)

Clinton is very much one of the main reasons I'm not a Democrat, even if I favor his presidency over Bush's or Reagen's. I condemn his Welfare Reform, the War on Kosovo and the Telecommunications Act among other things. However, when reflecting on Whitewater, I find the basis on which those like Gingrich in the GOP went after Clinton to begin with was a shameful witch hunt, where his affair with another woman was nothing but his and her family's business, which did indeed effectively lead to Clinton disgracing and embarrassing himself and his family for not being straight-forward and honest about what happened because Clinton both lacked spine, and the media and many in the GOP wouldn't stop attacking.

Making a storm about a blowjob, which didn't break any law or was felonous until Clinton lied under oath, is one thing. Routinely exercising disdain for the law of the land is another thing, and I believe it is widely recognized which is worse. Specter, Hagel, Wilson and other Republicans I believe are understanding this too.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
LeeJ
Member Patricius
since 06-19-2003
Posts 13093
SE PA


26 posted 02-09-2006 09:28 AM       View Profile for LeeJ   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for LeeJ

Hey Noah, good morning

you wrote this...

Because that IS the debate. I specifically said: "The issue here, plainly, is that Bush chose the illegal route in going about these operations, by not obtaining the court approval.". This is why this has escalated into a national issue. The problem has nothing to do with whether eavesdropping Americans is right or wrong...the problem is of Bush going about doing this without obeying the law.

Well, then, Noah, if this is the issue totally, then I'm glad Bush went the illegal route to listen into terrorist cell operations...to perhaps avoid another incident by picking up information from their conversations. I'm so happy someone's got the backbone to do this...cuz I want to know, someone's watching, no matter what they have to do to gain this information...Noah, this is real...it could hit your hometown, your public buildings, kill your friends and neighbors...and we're dealing with people, who have no sense of value for human life, not even children.  It is imparative that sometimes people understand that their are sometimes no guidlines that fit into certain situations well.  Sometimes a person has to make a decission which might be unpopular for the good of the majority, and in this case, in my mind Bush did right...and these people who are against him for doing so, well, God forbid, if they win against Bush, God help them if a bomb wipes out most of their friends, family, etc...perhaps then and only then, will they understand the need to do as such...I would most certainly do the same as Bush...and back him for doing so. illegal or not, Noah, back then when these laws were first drawn, these circumstances we face now, didn't exist.  

And again, where the heck does Spector get off when he knows that this wire tapping has gone on for years and years, probably Noah, before your time....and I'm for it...when it comes down to perhaps saving children from a dirty bomb...wire tapping to me seems very very trite.  Noah, we've become a world that isn't so nice, which sometimes needs some not so nice tactics.  You want a leader who is going to move on this...and not dilly dally around afraid of making decission b/c it might be unlawful?

I back the man on this 100%

And Mike Fitzpatrick, if your listening, don't call me again on this subject, using a voice message, which only gives me a yes or no answer, allow me to give you my two cents...dirty politics!!!! (very dirth politics!)


Christopher
Moderator
Member Rara Avis
since 08-02-99
Posts 9130
Purgatorial Incarceration


27 posted 02-09-2006 11:21 AM       View Profile for Christopher   Email Christopher   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Christopher

With all due respect, Noah, I've noticed that you certainly do exactly that - address only selected statements and completely gloss over others - as to your reasoning, I can only guess, but I've noticed it several times in this very thread.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


28 posted 02-09-2006 03:55 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

But you and I also both recognize that the scandal didn't start there. Many in the GOP really wanted to defame and embarrass Clinton long before Clinton shot himself in the foot for nothing more than political gain.

er, like you're saying the Democrats have not been after Bush for years on anything they thought they could make political hay on? From his service record to Gitmo to a zillion other things, the list goes on and on. They have done everything in their power to muddy him as much as possible, with utter disregard for the consequences. This time is no different. Wiretappings and clandestine activities have something in common....they are supposed to be SECRET to work. So what do the Democrats do? Paste them on the front pages, all in an effort to go after Bush. Between Gitmo (which mysteriously disappeared from the front pages after Democratic congressmen went down there to investigate) to this, I would fully expect AlQuaida to award drunk Teddy K and his cronies medals of honor for all they have done for them. They could care less about what's good for the country if it meant defeating Bush. They have shown it on several occassions.

Secrecy and not getting approval bothers you? Can you say "Hillary" and "FBI files" for me, please?

I only sound bitter because I am. The Democrats do not have a lock on sleazy politics, no doubt about that, but the way they are going about it with the world situation the way it is, with our soldiers fighting in the Middle East, with the threat of future terrorism in the US not only possible but promised by terrorist leaders....their actions - aimed at nothing more than throwing whatever rocks they can pick up at Bush - can easily be defined as giving aid and comfort (not to mention some good bellylaughs) to the enemy. Their actions are despicable...
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


29 posted 02-09-2006 05:19 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

As much as I believe there are indeed threats to our nation (I believe the war in Iraq has made them more real than ever), I believe the threats are being blown out of proportion and are overexaggerated. Some of the last few responses, honestly, struck me as apocalyptic in tone.

If it is truly believed that it is OK to act above this particular law during wartime, we might as well pretend the Third Amendment doesn't exist and require all households to have a soldier quartered in to protect us and our children. We might as well pretend the Fourth Amendment doesn't exist and allow our government to conduct break-ins everywhere and seize everything that could be used for terrorist plots, from matches to Swiss army knives to violent videogames. Beyond the Constitution, we might as well pretend Posse Comitatus doesn't exist and allow battalions to march to and fro 24/7 through each city square and neighborhood park.

Feingold was a bit far-fetched when he said that this president seems to live and behave in a pre-1776 world, since the Constitution wasn't completed until September 17, 1787. But he certainly seems to be acting as though it's a pre-1787 America. The bottom line is, every four years we elect a president who lives up to the spirit of Article II, Section 1 of our Constitution in making this very oath before he/she enters office:

"I do solemnly swear (or that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Whether it is peacetime or wartime, this oath is equally relevant, no matter who's in office, no matter how extreme or minor the circumstances are, and it is the president's supreme duty to defend everything our Constitution stands for.

I remain concerned that many still don't understand exactly how serious this matter is, and what truly is at stake. Many might feel here that this may be no big deal whatsoever and we can rise above the law because of extenuating circumstances just this once. But if we choose to remain just this passive, we may soon wake up and find ever more of our established principles and checks and balances chiseled and torn away, losing more of what we are.

I'm being dead serious here. In passively allowing our democratic principles to be sacrificed, we will only become even more vulnerable to what threatens our nation.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


30 posted 02-09-2006 05:47 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

Uh, I'm getting this really queasy feeling in my stomach.

So, how many of you think it's okay for a president to break the law?

Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


31 posted 02-09-2006 06:01 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

I don't agree with a lot of what the Democratic Party does or stands for either. Some of the things you listed including Gitmo, no, I believe it was important for the Democrats to investigate possible detainee abuse there, and I believe they're doing the right thing on the NSA case, but there is much that divides me from this party, particularly with the lack of vision.

I desire to keep on the thread topic, but I'll briefly say in my view I relate more with the Democrats than I do the Republicans. Many Republicans are trying to chip away at our domestic services, including food stamps, student loans and Medicaid to trade for ongoing war and tax cuts that only benefit the CEO's and richest of Americans. The Democrats are trying to stop these cuts to our essential basic qualities of life.

Many Republicans tried to eliminate eligibility for overtime pay for millions of workers, and the Democrats stopped that from happening.

Many Republicans are not allowing the minimum wage of our nation to be increased, while most Democrats have made ongoing efforts to try and have it raised.

Things like this are what convinces me I'm closer to being a Democrat in recent years than a Republican. I believe the Democrats as a party have a better understanding of strengthening the American family and recognizing the truth that a stronger American family makes a stronger America, and many Republicans do mean well but the party itself widely misses the point.

This administration is, frankly, forcing our grandchildren to pay the enormous debts which it is encouraging. I believe it epicly unacceptable that more and more Americans have been falling into poverty and without health insurance. And with more programs that they depend on in getting by being cut, their very lives are being endangered, and I find that utterly condemning.

I do applaud more and more in the GOP in taking note of these injustices and dissenting on Bush's intended program cuts in his budgets, and respect that they have the courage to speak out here. Unfortunately, I don't believe this administration gets it yet.

I think the very thing that hurts the GOP and gives Senate and House seats to the Democrats (I predict the Dems will gain 1-2 Senate seats and 6-9 House seats) in the forthcoming mid-term elections won't even have anything to do with the Democrats.....it'll be Karl Rove that helps the Democrats win, as he is threatening his own party in blacklisting any Republican who doesn't side with Bush on the NSA law issue. This will indeed be entertaining to watch.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


32 posted 02-09-2006 07:53 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

“Bin Laden threats may boost Bush”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4630054.stm


Maybe he’s on the RNC payroll . . .


Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


33 posted 02-09-2006 08:00 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You desire to keep the thread on topic??? then what was all that, Noah?

Gonzalez is stating that Bush did not break the law. i have a hard time imagining him saying that without having something to back it up.

As far as the Democrats are concerned, they are trying to induce by fear. They have made no claims that the wiretapping is not limited to international calls. They have made no claims that the average citizen is being spied upon, or has his phones tapped or mail read by this action of Bush. What they do is throw it up in the air for imagination to run wild with. "Phone lines are being tapped. What if that happened to you, Mr. Joe citizen?" "The government is using clandestine means cloaked in secrecy, people are under surveillance...would YOU like to be under surveillance, Mrs. housewife?" Is Mr. Joe citizen having his phone tapped? No. Is Mrs Housewife under surveillance? No...and they know it. They just want to create the illusion that MAYBE.......
Does it work? Here's Icebox wanting the government to pay part of his phone bill if they are going to listen in. Of course he said it in jest...but some people will have those thoughts seriously. The Democrats should change their emblem from the jackass (which is appropriate) to the innuendo. That would be more accurate....
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


34 posted 02-09-2006 09:57 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Gonzalez has went this entire week failing to offer any credible case to why it was necessary to ignore the 1978 act and instead just continues to spit out inconsistent, often laughable historical comparisons long before the time of FISA, including Washington intercepting letters from the British and Lincoln tapping telegraphs.

If we want to preserve our free republic, the answer to the question "Is the president above the law?" is no. Something doesn't automatically become legal because some lawyers you hire like John Yoo say it is. It has to be measured with the Constitution and established law in order to be legal.

There's an utter lack of respect to the Bill of Rights among other things happening here and in other instances. This administration acts as though if they themselves believe or decide some search or rising above the law is reasonable that it is automatically appropriate.

Of course, the American people can always decide themselves that it is OK that the Constitution be violated. I just hope that it is understood that you'll be asking for any loss of liberty in the process, and there's almost nothing you can do about it when you later look upon it and regret it.

*

*

Anyway, the GOP is no different in terms of playing with fear. On and on and on and on and on most of the party continues to exploit September 11th and, like Hilary Clinton said yesterday, "playing the fear card" on the American public. Karl Rove himself said he intends to make the war on terror the central party political issue for the 2006 mid-term elections. This means you can expect within the next nine months for this administration to try and scare the pants off of as many Americans as possible so they forget all other issues in our nation regarding the deteioration of our domestic fabric and poverty among other things, and count on them coming back crawling to their arms.

It's funny also, because looking back in numerous other times of crisis in history, I don't recall everyone running around like recalcitrant kids begging our government to break the law, reduce our liberties and place all our other aspirations on the backburner. Normally throughout history, we have been quite calm and resolute in the face of threats, and that is why much of the world believes we set a great example for the world. Giving into this mass apocalyptic hysteria is really the thing that would weaken our nation.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton

"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


35 posted 02-09-2006 10:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Why, indeed, should terrorism be one of t he most important things facing us? Just because Bin Laden and his cronies go one television to assure their followers that the United States WILL be attacked again, why should we take that seriously?

I can assure you of one thing, Noah. If the United States IS attacked, those same senators screaming at Bush right now for this will be demanding his head on a platter for not doing enough to prevent it. That's a given...

No one has to try to "scare the pants off" anyone, Noah. All they have to do is show the pics from 9/11 or Spain or London or any of the other places the terrorists have it. There are many people who actually do still remember that day...and the threat has not gone away.

By the way, which of your liberties have been reduced? You claim there are...name one, please.
latearrival
Member Elite
since 03-21-2003
Posts 4407
Florida


36 posted 02-10-2006 12:47 AM       View Profile for latearrival   Email latearrival   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for latearrival

Tee Hee~~ I learned many years ago not to say anything on a telephone I would not want repeated! Remember "party lines"?  No, not political party lines, telephone party lines when you had two to four other people sharing a telephone line!!  just an intent to lighten up. martyjo
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


37 posted 02-10-2006 01:51 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

In Malaysia's largest city, Kuala Lumpur, about 3,000 protesters marched from a mosque to the high rise building housing the Danish Embassy shouting: "Long live Islam. Destroy Denmark. Destroy Israel. Destroy George Bush. Destroy America!" ...Associated Press

This over a cartoon we had nothing to do with....security not a major issue, Noah?
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


38 posted 02-11-2006 01:53 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

Balladeer,

According to a National Review article, the cartoons
first appeared last September.  Since then there has been
a deliberate campaign to inflame the Moslem population
including the use of cartoons, (one of which shows Mohamed
mating with an animal), that were never among those published.
It was also noted that Denmark is scheduled to soon chair the committee
to look into Iran’s nuclear program and it’s violations of previous
agreements.

Off thread but thought you'd like to know.


Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


39 posted 02-11-2006 02:36 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

http://www.antiwar.com/reese/?articleid=8530

On spying:

quote:
The parallels with today's domestic spy program are almost exact. It was done in the name of national security. It was authorized by the president, John F. Kennedy, and the attorney general, Robert Kennedy, and carried out by the FBI. There was a war on ?in that case, the Vietnam War as well as the Cold War. It was kept secret from the public.

The FBI not only tapped King's telephones but also planted bugs in places where he was staying. One tape, which allegedly implicated King in an extramarital affair, was sent to Mrs. King.

Now think about this. Here is the federal government secretly spying on an American citizen and trying to break up his family and disrupt the civil-rights movement. And this was not done by some right-wing fanatic, but by two bona fide liberals, the Kennedy brothers.


On Exec. authority:

quote:
We are a nation of laws, not an empire and not a monarchy. Our Constitution deliberately created a weak chief executive.

The president, for example, is not our commander in chief. He's the commander in chief of the armed forces. As far as we civilians are concerned, he is just the administrator of laws passed by Congress. He cannot make laws. He cannot assume powers not given to him by the Constitution or by Congress. He must obey all the laws just the same as you and me.


On freedom:

quote:
Too many Americans are willing to let demagoguery scare them into writing a blank check to any politician who claims he will protect them from the boogeyman. I, for one, will never surrender this free republic, no matter how many enemies, real or imagined, are at the gates. What would be the point? Our ancestors fought for freedom and independence, not for a dictatorship. You can't be free if you give the president unlimited powers to violate both the laws and the Constitution.

The tension between a government of law and a government of men runs throughout American history.


The thing that bothers me here is not Bush's character or intent, it is not a defense of wiretapping, nor is it D fear versus R fear.

It's not what the government does here that bothers me, it's the idea that the president can break the law and that he can do it with impunity if he has a good reason.

What, if anything, is the constitution about except precisely saying no to that?

-----------------Dixi et salvavi animam meam
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


40 posted 02-11-2006 02:19 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

I don't believe that the President broke the law. The powers given to him by the Constitution, and more recently by the Congress, supercede the 1978 law on domestic wiretapping. We aren't talking about domestic spying anyway, not that you would know that by the political spin and media headlines. It is only international calls that are being monitored, and only then on known cell numbers that have a link to the terrorists, on calls to and from those numbers, even if the calls come into or go out of the U.S. The President would be derelict in his duties not to authorize such surveillance.

Life is of much greater importance than "the law" anyway, even if the accusation could be made to stick that the President broke "the law." Sometimes I think we forget that. We tend to place the notion that we are a "nation of laws" above all else. Law should be considered a servant, not a master, (similar to Christ's teaching, for instance, that the Sabbath was created for man and his benefit, and that man was not created to be a slave of the Sabbath). Common sense must prevail, and priorities have to be ordered properly.

It would be of more benefit to the welfare of this country, and its future survival, if the politicians would attack Al-Qaida and Islamic fascism with the same zeal as they do the President.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


41 posted 02-11-2006 05:50 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Huan Yi, it gets better than that. The investigation of the Lebanon assassination is due to come up. The Syrian leader told the UN that he and his brother wanted immunity for turning over the rest of the participants in it. The UN refused. It is due to come up before the UN Security Council and they are going after everyone responsible, all the way up. At about the same time this will happen, there will be a new Security council leader. Guess what? It's the Danish member of the UN. Wait till you see the fireworks....
Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


42 posted 02-11-2006 07:00 PM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad

quote:
I don't believe that the President broke the law. The powers given to him by the Constitution, and more recently by the Congress, supercede the 1978 law on domestic wiretapping.


But, Denise, do you accept the premise?

If he broke the law should there be consequences?

If extremism in the name of liberty is no vice, there are multiple fronts in the battle. None of them should be prioritized over another (except, perhaps by the law)


Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


43 posted 02-11-2006 07:31 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

Hey, thanks for sharing that article, Brad!

Look, Balladeer, both you and I believe it a central and essential responsibility to protect our country and our citizens at all costs. We may disagree on terms of ideology in how we go about doing so, but I assure I believe it a most important mantra which we must continue to resonate.

All I'm also saying is that fear is a most powerful weapon, which can easily become toxic if manipulated or used. It is naive to pretend that there is no threat in the world, but it is also dangerous and unhealthy to be frequently encumbered in fear and panic. Fear itself is what blows the threat out of proportion, and only ensures paranoia among ourselves.

I was simply saying that there have been many times when our nation was challenged with conflict in the past and we were far more calm and resolute during those times. Our confidence and dual-belief approach that 1) we do and accept that there is a conflict and 2) yet, we also have the ability to overcome this with a cool resolve, has proven to be a successful and healthy way in dealing with any number of conflicts, while fear can easily tend to self-destruct itself.

*

And, yes, a number of civil liberties ARE being infringed upon in result of this fear. Peace groups like the Quaker Meeting House in your state of residence Florida were monitored at Lake Worth, as well as a number of gay pride groups and anti-war groups. Thousands of Google records and other records are being monitored and attempted to be handed over to a sole department, where they will likely hold them for years and could easily encourage identity theft. Your local library could be prone to searches should you check-out any controversial book even if you only did so to critique it for a research paper. Things like this are happening in result of this fear.

*
http://www.abanews.org/releases/news021006.html

The American Bar Association sponsored this new Harris Interactive poll conducted through telephone surveying between February 3rd and 6th.

It found that 52 percent agreed that a president should never be able to "suspend the constitutional freedoms of people like you." even during wartime. An additional 25 percent said constitutional freedoms should never be suspended unless authorized by a court or Congress.

A second question adds that 45 percent believe it would never be justified to allow government eavesdropping on personal communications without a search warrant or court order, with 48 percent divided (22% believing it OK based on an anonymous tip of helping to plan a terrorist attack in the U.S, and another 21% believing it OK based on suspicion you were sending money to a terrorist organization. (which it's constructed like an either/or situation, in whether you react to that anonymous tip OR spy warrantless, which both are legal as long as the latter is sought within 72 hours of the wiretap.)

This poll reads that a strong majority believe the Constitution still matters regardless of the circumstances, and I believe there's widespread skepticism in that this administration still hasn't explained why the current law is inadequate to fulfill the security requirements of our nation.

*

I have not at all forgotten 9/11...clearly I still remember where I was each moment that day...from the time it was nearly 8:00 that morning and my mom was taking me to school in our old green Dodge Caravan, and we were listening to our favorite adult alternative station KBCO 90.7 when the breaking news came in, to when we were both crying minutes before we pulled into the front parking lot of my school and hugging each other, not letting go for about four minutes or so, then walking into school to remain glued to the TV set until 10:30, then school was cancelled and I waited in the art room until my mom came to pick me up at around 1:00 where me and my art teacher Ms. Dunlap talked on and on about the latest developing parts of the news and beginning incredibly slowly a poem of my tears reflecting whoever was lost that day. The memory of 9/11 resonates deeply with me to this day, and I believe it's a memory almost everyone in this nation holds dear.

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


44 posted 02-11-2006 07:44 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I'm afraid you missed my question, Noah..

By the way, which of your liberties have been reduced? You claim there are...name one, please.

What in your life has changed as a result of Bush's actions? In your normal, daily life what restrictions have been placed on you? Whay can you not do that you could do before 911? True, if you fly, you now have to go through a scurity checkpoint. What else? You speak of our rights and civil liberties being violated by this president's actions so I ask you.....name one that you personally have lost, please?
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


45 posted 02-11-2006 07:52 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Life is of much greater importance than "the law" anyway, even if the accusation could be made to stick that the President broke "the law."

Doesn't that make the deaths of a LOT of good Americans, from 1776 right up to 2006, something of a sham, Denise? I have to suspect those who gave their lives over the years to secure our liberties rather hoped they would be valued a little more highly.

America, it seems, has changed. Freedom might be worth the lives of countless soldiers, but the minute the life of a civilian is placed in nebulous jeopardy the scales suddenly tip in the other direction. People want to feel safe, and if that feeling of safety costs them a few minor liberties, well, so be it. Ideals, after all, aren't worth dying for, our entire history not withstanding.

If our young men are dieing only to save civilian lives at home, frankly, it isn't worth it. My life isn't worth theirs. Neither is yours. If they're not fighting to protect a way of life, one that insures that all Americans are protected by the law, then those boys shouldn't be fighting at all. When did Home of the Brave come to apply only to those wearing a uniform?

I don't think the terrorists really need to mount another attack against this country. Their goal has ever been to instill fear and, clearly, they've already won.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


46 posted 02-11-2006 07:56 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

If he broke the law should there be consequences?

You're going into hypotheticals now, Brad?

Senator John McCain, never one to fear criticizing Bush if his views differ, said on Letterman the other night that Bush had not broken the law. What he did was basically disregard the diplomatic move of contacting the top congressional leaders on it first. Bush undiplomatic...what a concept! The Democratic congressional leaders, smarting from a tweaked nose, are howling at the insult..we don't have a situation of breaking the law but rather breaking procedure.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


47 posted 02-11-2006 08:00 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

I have to suspect those who gave their lives over the years to secure our liberties rather hoped they would be valued a little more highly.

Same question to you, Ron, as to Noah. Which of your liberties have been violated? Which have been undervalued?

Fear does not rule us but caution does. I don;t see that as a bad thing..
Mistletoe Angel
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 5 Tours
Member Empyrean
since 12-17-2000
Posts 34089
City of Roses


48 posted 02-11-2006 08:02 PM       View Profile for Mistletoe Angel   Email Mistletoe Angel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Mistletoe Angel's Home Page   View IP for Mistletoe Angel

To this day, I myself have not lost one to my knowledge.

I haven't individually been stripped of a liberty, but it certainly doesn't mean that our nation's liberties at large are at risk and there are others who have been victimized. I have no clue if I have been spied on in any peaceful war protest I've participated in, but there's many who have been and if a single department holds onto those records for years, they could be victims of identity theft. I also know a number of local Portlanders who were subject to break-ins because they volunteer for Food Not Bombs, an all-volunteer organization dedicated to non-violent social change with local chapters nationwide working to share free vegetarian food with all citizens. And if we don't recognize that they are at risk, both you and I could ultimately lose what was taken for granted if this becomes a passive routine allowance.

It does concern me that you don't appear the slight bit concerned that if indeed those break-ins could happen to hunger activists, your own Fourth Amendment rights could also be at risk. (unless of course you don't mind any searches if you believe it's only intended to protect you.)

Sincerely,
Noah Eaton


"If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other"

Mother Teresa
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


49 posted 02-11-2006 08:27 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Noah, I am not as concerned because I do not believe that actions like that are just random acts for the hell of it with no basis to back them up. All you know is that searches were made. Do you know why? No, you don't and neither do I but I doubt it was without reason. You would need a lot more facts than you have to make statements like yours.

No, I don't mind any searches that are intended to protect me at all. If someone feels that they have the need to search me or my past, based on reasonable assumptions, let them. I have nothing to hide nor fear.

By the way, when you are quoting the 4th amendment, don't forget that the word "unreasonable" is in there.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> What the heck   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors